Debates of June 11th, 2002

Government Contracts

[Pierre Brien, Bloc, Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister can try as he will to distract us from the sponsorship issue by introducing a new code of ethics, but he cannot do anything about the many scandals plaguing his government, which even the Deputy Prime Minister refuses to defend.

Will the Prime Minister admit that ethics rules are irrelevant if people spend most of their time trying to circumvent them, as is the case with the Prime Minister and his ministers in the sponsorship affair?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, in response to difficulties in the sponsorship program, the department of public works took the initiative itself to launch an internal audit. I would remind the hon. member that the auditor general, in commenting upon the internal audit section of Public Works and Government Services Canada, called that internal audit section excellent, courageous and having done a critical piece of work to get to the bottom of what was wrong.

[Pierre Brien, Bloc, Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, ethics rules existed, and despite this, millions of dollars were shamelessly misappropriated in the sponsorship affair.

The Prime Minister can try as he will to divert our attention with new ethics rules to clean up his act and that of his ministers, but he cannot erase the past.

Does he not understand that a true public inquiry is needed, and that this is the only acceptable way for him to respond to the scandals that are plaguing his government?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, in responding properly to the situation, beyond the internal audit work that was done, I would remind the House that a departmental review is underway. The auditor general will be commencing a government wide examination of sponsorships and advertising. The police are notified whenever suspicious circumstances occur. The treasury board is examining the governance and management frameworks for sponsorship, advertising and polling, and of course the public accounts committee is holding hearings.

Human Resources Development

[James Moore, Canadian Alliance, Port Moody—Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it appears that Les Confections St-Élie inc., a business in the Prime Minister's riding of course, received a lot of help from the Prime Minister. It received a $900,000 BDC loan, $285,000 in job creation grants and $165,000 from another company's grant all the while owing over $330,000 in back taxes. The company went bankrupt 18 months later.

How can the Prime Minister defend throwing all this corporate welfare at a failed company, which he knew would fail, just because it was in his own riding? How can the Prime Minister be so irresponsible with taxpayers' dollars?

[Jane Stewart, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, I want to again point out to the hon. gentleman that the government undertook to review these files completely. We commissioned a forensic audit and the results of that audit suggested that the files should be referred to the RCMP. That referral was done.

The RCMP are continuing their investigations on one of the files so it is inappropriate to talk about those further. I also want to remind the hon. member that those transitional job funds required the support of many partners to be funded in the longer term.

[James Moore, Canadian Alliance, Port Moody—Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Speaker, here is a review of the facts. The Prime Minister intervened three times to help a Liberal supporter in his riding get a grant against the rules. Over $1 million was lost. A detailed audit of the company brought on an RCMP investigation. Although the auditors said that a web of companies was created to defraud Canadians of their money, no charges were ever laid.

Why did the government fail to protect taxpayers by not finding the criminals? Was it simply trying to protect the Prime Minister at the expense of Canadian taxpayers?

[Jane Stewart, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, the best I can do is try to go through this yet again.

There were questions on these files. We requested a forensic audit on these files. We referred the files to the RCMP. The RCMP came back in two cases and said that no charges would be laid.

The third file, the one to which the hon. member made reference, is still open with the RCMP. It is there with the organization that should be looking at these questions.

Health Care

[Liza Frulla, Liberal, Verdun—Saint-Henri—Saint-Paul—Pointe Saint-Charles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, let us talk about the number one priority of all Canadians, the health care system.

We know how the shortage of doctors is affecting the health system all across Canada, particularly in remote areas.

Obviously members opposite do not care.

Could the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration tell us what new measures were taken by the government to speed up the immigration process of new doctors who want to practice in Canada?

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, first I want to congratulate the hon. member on her first question, a very eloquent one, in the House.

Just this morning, with the support of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, we tabled the new rules that will pave the way for a new immigration system that will work flawlessly.

That being said, there is still a lot of work to do. This is why I am pleased to announce to the hon. members of this House that the first federal-provincial-territorial conference on immigration will be held on October 15 and 16, in Winnipeg. We will then deal with the issue of equivalency, so as to solve this problem.

The Environment

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—St. Clair, ON]

Mr. Speaker, when the G-8 foreign ministers meet in Whistler tomorrow they will discuss a U.S. proposal to fund a plutonium disposition program. The proposal to pursue the so-called MOX option is unsafe for the environment, extremely costly and could increase the potential of plutonium falling into the hands of terrorists.

In light of the real threat of nuclear terrorist attacks, as demonstrated by recent events in the U.S., will the Prime Minister assure all Canadians that he will oppose the MOX option and ensure that any option that is adopted is subjected to a full environmental review and brought before the appropriate parliamentary committees?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, this is an extremely important problem. We have to ensure that nuclear waste is not circulated across the world. Any positive contribution Canada could make would be very good for the security of the Canadian people and very good for the protection of the environment.

Steel Industry

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the government's inability to negotiate fair trade deals and respond to American tariffs continues to punish Canadian industry. Last March the U.S. president slapped tariffs of up to 30% on steel imports to protect its industry.

My question is for the Minister for International Trade. Why does the government not listen to our steelworkers, take safeguard actions against dumping, including retroactive penalties,and support Canadian industry and jobs for a change?

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister for International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, this government, after consultation with the industry, has done exactly what it has asked us to do. We are going to the Canadian International Trade Tribunal. The CITT that will determine whether there is dumping in Canada at this moment.

We have been working with the unions. We have been working with industry. We are working to ensure that Canada does not become a dumping ground in light of the American action.

Government Contracts

[Peter MacKay, Progressive Conservative, Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS]

Mr. Speaker, their faces should be as red as this folder. For two days now the public works minister has vowed to try to get back the $333,000 of taxpayer money to the treasury. This is money that was sent to sponsor a Quebec City hunting and fishing show that never occurred.

How is he going to do it? How is he going to get that money back; the courts, a collection agency or a collect phone call? Has the minister's department even contacted Groupe Polygone, the firm that received the money? Could he now assure Canadians that their hard earned tax dollars will be reimbursed with interest?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, I have given instructions to my department to pursue the repayment of these funds by all means possible. It will do that. If it can be recovered through a simple request, fine. If not, we will consider all our options to ensure that the money is repaid.

[Peter MacKay, Progressive Conservative, Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS]

Mr. Speaker, this should not be a difficult exercise. It is very simple. He should pick up the phone and call the person who received the money. He should call his friends and ask for the money back.

Will the minister of public works do that immediately? Could he tell the House if his department has found any other contracts in which government cheques were written for nothing in return? Money for nothing; money for nothing.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, I have given the instructions to my officials to pursue this matter. I expect them to do that. If they need my intervention personally, I would be happy to assist them to ensure that the taxpayers are made whole.

With respect to the question of other issues related to value for money, as the hon. gentleman knows, that will be exactly the topic that will be inquired into by the auditor general. To the best of my knowledge at this moment, there are no other instances. However the auditor general herself has said she wishes to do a government-wide audit and she will.

[Kevin Sorenson, Canadian Alliance, Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the minister of public works needs to come clean with Canadians. Yesterday he stonewalled in the House, then paraded outside giving a completely different answer than what he did in the House.

Would he clearly, and without his rehearsed lawyerly responses, tell the House how many matters he has referred to the RCMP?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, references to the police are not the same as police investigations. The police themselves determine what they will investigate and no government should tell them where to go in their investigations. I do not want to interfere with the police in that process.

When I am asked a specific question about a specific file, in the interests of transparency, I give a very direct answer. I am aware of no other police references other than those that have been mentioned publicly.

[Kevin Sorenson, Canadian Alliance, Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the public works minister is doing more damage control and not giving Canadians the transparency that he promised he would.

Could the minister explain why telling us the number of referrals that he has made to the RCMP could possibly compromise or jeopardize any ongoing or potential investigation?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, for the simple reason that when I comment on a particular reference, obviously the matter is put in the public domain and may in fact tip off those who the police wish to investigate.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in June 1994, the Prime Minister said:

The trust in institutions is as vital to a democracy as the air we breathe, a trust that once shattered, is difficult, almost impossible to rebuild.

By not allowing a public debate on the whole issue of sponsorship just before the election campaign, is the Prime Minister not the one who will have done the most to undermine public trust in our political institutions?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, quite to the contrary. The matter was not removed from the public arena. The fact that there was an internal audit was disclosed. It was put on the Internet and was published in the Globe and Mail . That is hardly removing something from the public arena. It is putting something into the public arena.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Mr. Speaker, if the Prime Minister is doing everything he can to avoid a public inquiry, is it not because he knows that he is the one who would be at the centre of this inquiry, since he has known for two years and he tried to cover up the whole thing?